All the ladies finish second when I'm around.Originally Posted by Bob Loblaw
All the ladies finish second when I'm around.
It's better to burn out, than to fade away.
or fail to finish at all?
That's clearly Diane Abbott.
NOTE: The location of this post has been moved and the thread title (which was previously Wenger is Leaving) has been manipulated by a notorious pro-Wenger moderator. What was previously a message that contained no profanity and made a comment on a real life event has now been manipulated by a deliberately provocative title. An old and crude propaganda and censorship technique.
Harambe.
Ched Evans found not guilty - I wonder how people will retract the statements they made about him two years ago
In my opinion the guy is a sleazy scumbag, but there is a difference between that and conmitting a crime
Just posted that in General Football Nonsense. Basically agree, he's a sleaze but probably not a criminal.
That's the plan
It's better to burn out, than to fade away.
Interesting how the Daily Heil has questioned using evidence about her previous 'engagements'. They are missing the point. Normally, sexual history is not relevant. If a woman has had 1000 partners, she still has the right to say no. However, in this case, the fact that 2 other men independently said that she had done the same things in the same way is very relevant to the case, which is why the judge allowed the defence to present that evidence.
I terms of her being prosecuted herself, that is a different manner. The defence evidence shows reasonable doubt and for that alone, he has to be found innocent. But it cuts both ways. For her to be prosecuted for false accusation requires there to be no reasonable doubt too, so both parties have to be treated as innocent - of rape and of false accusation of rape.
The low conviction rate of rapes which some consider a scandal is because when you have the situation of one person's word against another, then it is highly likely that it cannot be proved beyond reasonable doubt.
Mind you, having served as foreman of a jury, I can tell you that the reason some people want to put forward a guilty verdict is often based on a feeling that they don't like the person. On one trial, outside the court and jury room (so I can legally tell you this) two jurers were chatting about a case and one said to the other 'Well, he has a social worker with him so he must be guilty of something'. And yes, they were both reading the Daily Heil! I can't relate what happened in the jury room though as that is not permitted. However, some of the other crass comments by jurers changed my view of the jury system - you cannot expect the general public with no understanding of procedures, logic, reason, independence, etc. to be able to make proper decisions. Think of the dummest people you know, think of them as a group of 12 making life-changing decisions about someone they know little about - imagine if it was you. Frightening.
#brexit.
The trouble with democracy is that it's based on the idea that everyone has an equally valid opinion and that just isn't true.
I remember years ago rumblings of a referendum about us adopting the Euro and thinking "Don't ask me!". I like to think I'm reasonably intelligent and well educated but I got a D in Economics!Were there such a referendum I'd try to educate myself on the relevant issues to try and make an informed decision but I'm not a subject matter expert, why would I be? And millions of Sun and Daily Mail readers would vote no because of the "bloody Frogs" and "all them foreigners". Why do those people get a say?
I'm increasingly disillusioned with the whole system. I cannot get my head around the fact that Trump has just boasted about sexually assaulting women (and this after a torrent of lies, racism, misogyny over the last year) and rather than being deselected people are waving little American flags at him and voting for him.
Logic
Reason
Reply With Quote
